« Courts - SCOTUS denied cert in case re the distinction between off-campus and on-campus speech | Main | Stage Collapse - "Will all state fair claims be paid?" »

Wednesday, November 02, 2011

Law - Wisconsin House "passes bill giving homeowners more authority to use deadly force"

Jason Stein and Patrick Marley reported in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel yesterday:

Madison - Homeowners using deadly force against intruders would get powerful legal protection, under a bill approved by the Assembly [House] late Tuesday. * * *

Under the bill, courts in most criminal and civil matters would presume that property owners using deadly force had acted reasonably against anyone unlawfully inside their residence, business or vehicle, whether they were armed or not. The proposal is sometimes known as "castle doctrine" legislation, a reference to the saying that one's home is one's castle. * * *

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm has said Wisconsin, like most states, doesn't need a castle doctrine because current law provides more than adequate protection for anyone legitimately acting in self-defense. Sheboygan County District Attorney Joe DeCecco said that strangers occasionally enter the wrong homes accidentally if they're confused or drunk.

"Shouldn't there be some minimal effort required to assess the situation or call police before firing?" DeCecco asked.

Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said he had not reviewed the particulars of the bill, but that he supported the general concept.

"Being a Second Amendment advocate, I have always been a proponent of some form of the castle doctrine," he said. "I'm a strong believer that law-abiding citizens can be trusted with firearms, know how and when to use them when they feel like they have to, and they should have the ability to protect themselves."

Under current law, a person can't seek to kill or wound someone unless he or she reasonably believes it's needed to prevent the same type of injury to himself or herself.

Supporters of the bill say that people in their homes or businesses don't necessarily have the time to check whether an intruder is trying to hurt them.

The proposed immunity under the castle doctrine legislation wouldn't apply to people who were using their home or other property for crimes such as drug dealing.

It also wouldn't shield a shooter who attacked someone who he or she knew or should have known was a police officer.

ILB: Indiana has a similar law, IC 35-41--3-2. It has been a part of the discussion of the Indiana Supreme Court's Barnes decision. Indiana's law does not have the police officer exception.

For an interesting pre-Barnes look at the Indiana "castle law," see this Oct. 1, 2008 ILB entry, quoting a story by Francesca Jarosz, then of the Indianapolis Star, headed "When deadly force is justified."

Posted by Marcia Oddi on November 2, 2011 10:07 AM
Posted to General Law Related